Color marks on zinkers, how?

I stopped reading! the only possible equation that I can come up with. Is some sort of split plating upon strike.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I like that you aren't insisting there are some roughly one million ways those prevalent spots, that are common on the shields, all came to exist on the series.

 

Chain of Custody; United States Mint Roll to me. Rather large "rinse spot" causing "toning" in up to some several thousands of possible ways? I am but a caveman.

 

This sentiment does seem to represent the vocal majority that appear to me to have no interest in explaining exactly how these very specific blems come to exist. Respectfully, this sentiment strikes me as a flowery way of saying I do not know or care.

 

Almost true, and, somewhat misleading. Nickel is far more reactive than copper. Copper is only slightly more reactive than silver or gold. It is the third least reactive metal that exists, silver second and gold the least reactive.

Many other much more reactive metals simply don't manifest what clearly appear to be heat affected zones of "toning" and go thru far more varied and adverse conditions than pennies.

So why are these spots that appear to be HAZ's, not appear on nickels or the dollar coins? I haven't seen them on the nickels at all and will own I haven't checked enough gold hue'd dollar coins to determine if they do or not.

Nickels do go thru a drier yet are not electro-plated.

 

That's why Doug said "...except for the Dollar coins" which are made from a copper/zinc/manganese/nickel alloy. Btw the Jefferson Nickel is a copper/nickel alloy, too. Are you aware you're playing with the "big boys" here? ;-)

 

Do you maintain that Cupronickel is more or less reactive than copper?

I am aware of what I have posted and what others have posted.

I am also aware I forgot platinum is even less reactive than gold.

 

It's all here, nicely summarized: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactivity_series
Not really rocket science...

 

You are aware you didn't remotely come close to answering the question about Cupronickel, correct?

 

I was going to stay out of this, but this is just foolish.

The table being referred to is for reactivity as those specific ions. However gold for instance does not easily produce ions for chemical reactions in solutions. A much stronger acid has to be used to detect gold as a metal than silver or copper as a metal. You can do the chemistry for nickel alloys like stainless steel also if you wish. Believe what you will, but don't store strong chemicals in a copper container.

 

used for our coins, it is

 

If the table can't be applied to coins then I sincerely apologize, Jim. You're the chemist, I'll let you do the talking

 

I don't believe new unc coins get subjected to those types of strong chemicals. If they do, just tell me which one specifically causes the "toning" I've shown and is very common on the shields.

I just about believe with a half an amp arc, I can replicate that toning and plating piercing just by popping one with a tig capable of carrying such a low current arc. A good old transformer unit can do that with very few modern tigs capable of anything less than 3-5A. 3-5A would pop a hole thru a zinker for anything more than an instant.

FWIW, I do have both brass and copper pump cans in my old shop that have held up fine for many years. They generally sit near much more reactive exotic metals (than copper) that barely change at all thru the years despite all manners of reactive mayhem taking place in the general area. I store my nitric acids for testing gold content in glass.

So it's unclear to me if, as far as you're concerned, it doesn't matter what the cause is since you're certain the result is toning, or if you reject the specific "toning spots" I've shown could be Heat Affected Zones caused most likely in one of two ways.

 

Of course the mint doesn't use any strength /time ratio of acids to dissolve the coin metal, but that is what your 'reactivity ' chart indicated you thought occurred with your comments about the 3 metals. Do you admit you are wrong on that???To be straight forward, I care little about cents that modern. It is a colored change and that is toning. If you are implying it is mint damage for some reason, that's your point to prove. I don't buy it. Environmental damage. You can cook, fry, or boil all of the cents you wish, others have in the past and they caused toning, but you have to prove the source and time need to do so at the mint. Seek Help!

 

It's apparent that Ordinary Fool is just trolling the list. members with years of experience in numismatics have said that it's toning. People with advanced degrees in chemistry and materials science have said it's toning. It could be due to any number of things from a sneeze by a teller, to crumbs from a lunch counter. They have been observed coins prior to 2010 but over time, the toning/corrosion has gotten worse because copper is such a reactive element.

Ordinary "Troll", please go home. I am among the many members of CT who enjoy trying to help people learn about the hobby. While it pains me to say this, please don't let the door hit you in the [where the sun doesn't shine] on the way out

 

I was responding to those who implied one couldn't sneeze five rooms over from a copper penny without it instantly toning. Keep in mind what you are seeing is a manifestation that is precipitated by a rapid and instant cause. So respectfully, I give you no joy relative to your request for admission.

Also, I claim no ownership of said chart or its posting.

If this damage isn't caused at the mint, either in some inductive heat drier that zaps several here and there, OR burns off debris or swarf causing the spots, or they are created in some particular plating process, then that leaves only coin handling equipment shocking them and if that were the case, why only pennies? I'm not buying coin handling equipment is wasting valuable energy resources shocking, like a crazed tesla coil arcing all over their surfaces, just pennies from 2010, and maybe to some extent 2000 pennies.

However, if you really don't care and truly don't know the cause, or even care to form any hypothesis as to the specific cause of very specific "toning", then why do you waste your time and mine responding in this thread? Why, much less suggesting I need some sort of help?

Do you actually feel I am trying to sell you anything and you are seemingly having to make a decision to buy?

I don't believe I am trying to sell you or anyone, anything.

I'm quite a humble man and my ego was put in check years ago.

 

See, you have access to the Curriculum Vitae of everyone except myself it would seem. There surely would be no fallacy for you, while propping everyone other than yourself up with a Vitae, to suggest, no make that demand, a blind AND UNQUESTIONING Appeal to Authority that is quite hollow.

Read that "your" authorities are saying nobody can say what causes these specific spots nor does anyone care other than me. Also no fallacy for you, or anyone, dismissing myself as a void entity while you patently ignore what is clearly shown and quite difficult to explain other than by a few very narrow causal relationships.

It is likely I should be impressed and honored you took time out of trying to help people to even address me. I'll take that under advisement and lose no sleep that you either have no idea or care what causes those very specific spots and even piercing of the plating.

Oh that's right, TONING causes that specific damage to manifest and is attributable to no less than 1,000,000 potential environmental contributors and who cares. ;-)

That's not science.......